Note: This is a beta release of Red Hat Bugzilla 5.0. The data contained within is a snapshot of the live data so any changes you make will not be reflected in the production Bugzilla. Also email is disabled so feel free to test any aspect of the site that you want. File any problems you find or give feedback here.

Bug 81004

Summary: Fatal error retrieving privacy statement: Connection refused
Product: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 4 Reporter: Roger Killick <roger.killick>
Component: up2dateAssignee: Adrian Likins <alikins>
Status: CLOSED WORKSFORME QA Contact: Red Hat Satellite QA List <satellite-qa-list>
Severity: medium Docs Contact:
Priority: medium    
Version: 4.0CC: cturner, gafton, mihai.ibanescu, taw
Target Milestone: ---   
Target Release: ---   
Hardware: i586   
OS: Linux   
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version: Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: Environment:
Last Closed: 2003-01-20 21:55:20 UTC Type: ---
Regression: --- Mount Type: ---
Documentation: --- CRM:
Verified Versions: Category: ---
oVirt Team: --- RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: --- Target Upstream Version:

Description Roger Killick 2003-01-03 11:16:21 UTC
From Bugzilla Helper:
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.0.1) Gecko/20020830

Description of problem:
Have installed RH 8 out of the box and have registered with RedHat network
config program. System tells me that there is are 17 updates, but each time get
the above message when runnung up2date. Am connected via a local proxy (no
authentification) but this seems to work fine on Port 80/443 and system can
obviosuy talk to RHN as it detects the 17 updates. Have tried a number of times,
but error repeats. There is a basic entitlement for this system in RHN(user
"killickr", systen "ntop-wan".

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):


How reproducible:
Always

Steps to Reproduce:
1.Run up2date
2.
3.
    

Expected Results:  Should connect and run through update process.

Additional info:

Comment 1 Adrian Likins 2003-01-15 04:56:17 UTC
is this still an issue?

Sounds like a temporary server side issue, and I haven't
seen any other reports of similar behaviour.